Practical statistics for medical research / Douglas G. Altman. p. cm. Originally published: London: Chapman & Hall, Includes bibliographical references . Douglas-G-Altman-Practical-Statistics-for-Medical-Research- Chapman-Hall-CRCpdf - Ebook download as PDF File .pdf) or read book . PRACTICAL. STATISTICS. FOR. MEDICAL. RESEARCH. Douglas G. Altman. Head of Medical Statistical Laboratory. Imperial Cancer Research Fund. London.

Practical Statistics For Medical Research Altman Pdf

Language:English, Japanese, German
Published (Last):17.08.2016
ePub File Size:22.85 MB
PDF File Size:14.14 MB
Distribution:Free* [*Sign up for free]
Uploaded by: VICTORINA

Practical Statistics for Medical Research. Edited by Douglas G. Altman. ISBN 0- , Chapman and Hall, London, , pp., $ Until recently. Statistics in Medicine. Book Review. Practical statistics for medical research. Douglas G. Altman, Chapman and Hall, London, No. of pages: Price: £. Statistics in Medicine · Volume 10, Issue 10 Practical statistics for medical research. Douglas G. Altman, Chapman and Hall, London, No. of pages:

The American Naturalist , Read Araujo, P. Determining variability, confidence,and statistical power in aquaculture experiments.

The Israeli Journal of Aquaculture - Bamidgeh 60 2 , Read [free pdf] Armitage, P. Statistical methods in medical research. Blackwells, Oxford. Armenian, H. The case-control method. Design and applications.

Oxford University Press, Oxford. Read Axelson, O. Use of the prevalence ratio v the prevalence odds ratio as a measure of risk in cross sectional studies.

Occupational and Environmental Medicine 51 8 , Read [free] Baigent, C. The need for large-scale randomized evidence. British Journal of Pharmacology 43, Read Read [free pdf] Baker, J.

Evaluating the impact of development projects on poverty. A handbook for practitioners The World Bank. Read [free pdf] Blackburn, T.

Method in macroecology Basic and Applied Ecology 5 5 , Read Blackmore, C. Observational studies in radiology. American Journal of Roentgenology , Read [free pdf] Bland, M. Not a case-control study.

Rapid response BMJ 14 July. Read [no longer accessible] Bland, J.

Cluster randomised trials in the medical literature: two bibliometric surveys. Read Read [free pdf] Bland, J. The experimental unit is wrong. Rapid Response. BMJ 27 August. Read [no longer accessible] Block, W. Design and implementation of monitoring studies to evaluate the success of ecological restoration on wildlife. Restoration Ecology 9 3 , Read Read [free pdf] Bennett, S. Methods for the analysis of incidence rates in cluster randomized trials.

International Journal of Epidemiology 31 4 , Read [free pdf] Benson, K. A comparison of observational studies and randomized, controlled trials. New England Journal of Medicine , Read [free pdf] Biesheuvel, C.

Advantages of the nested case-control design in diagnostic research.

Effects of systematic exposure assessment errors in partially ecologic case-control studies. International Journal of Epidemiology 31 1 , Read [free pdf] Bland, J. Statistics Notes - Trials randomised in clusters. BMJ , 6 September. Read [free pdf] Bloom et al. The use and misuse of matching in case-control studies: the example of PCOS. Fertility and Sterility 88 3 , Read [free pdf] Bailey, R.

Cambridge University Press. Read [free pdf] Brenner, H. Effect of nondifferential exposure misclassification in ecologic studies.

American Journal of Epidemiology , Read Bernhardsen, T. Geographic information systems: An introduction. Wiley, New York. A simplified general method for cluster-sample surveys. World Health Organization Statistical Quarterly 44 3 , BMJ , 29 October.

Read [free pdf] Boutron I, et al. Reporting methods of blinding in randomized trials assessing nonpharmacological treatments. PLoS Medicine 4 2 : e Scale for resource selection functions. Diversity and Distributions 12 1 , Read Read [free pdf] Barros, A.

As sampling precision is related to the square function of the statistics used. With a tcv , and the standard error of the sample mean SE , higher level of confidence, the interval needs to be wider according to the following formula: in order to support the claim of having included the population parameter at the chosen level of confidence. It is not the case, however, that, at a given confidence level, a narrow CI is any more or less likely than a wider 5 The probability of including the parameter is deter- mined by the chosen confidence level, not by the width 5 The probability of inclusion, however, is the same in both cases.

A statistic such as a sample mean is just one estimate of the population mean, and, because the population mean is nearly always unknown, it is not possible to know how good the estimate is. In this case, the population mean is 9.

Any one of these point estimates of the mean, taken on its own, gives no indication of how precise an estimate it is or of how near it lies to the population mean. Moreover, the width Figure 2. The solid horizontal reference line represents the population mean of 9. The point estimate.

Because each CI differs from sample 10 samples. In many cases, The way in which the null hypothesis is tested by means however, researchers may want to test a specific hypoth- of a CI is by determining whether the null value ie, the esis, as in the example of the FMS study considered value specified in the null hypothesis lies within the CI.

Although the orthodox approach is to conduct a If the null value lies within the CI, we cannot exclude it hypothesis test, in this case using the independent- as being the population parameter at the chosen level of measures t test Tab.

In contrast, if the null value lies outside the reject or retain the null hypothesis, and thereby perform CI, we can exclude the null value from the possible precisely the same function as the orthodox significance values of the population parameter at this level of test. The appropriate CI for hypothesis testing is deter- confidence.

1st Edition

The null value is that of Physical Therapy. Table 4. The t test performed rejected the difference that would be found in the population of null hypothesis that the population difference between patients with FMS would be greater than zero, which is treatments is zero Tab.

This advantage of the CI can be hypothesis, in respect to this particular sample, based on illustrated by considering the results of a second exper- any population difference outside the limits of the CI. The t test, in contrast, only serves to depending on the size of the sample. Thus, the proba- exclude a difference of zero and does not allow infer- bility value is not a direct function of the effect size ences to be made about other possible values of the alone, but is instead a function of both the effect size and population parameter.

It follows If a series of CIs are calculated on a given data set, the that knowledge of the probability value returned by a risk of a Type I error ie, the risk of rejecting the null hypothesis test does not, on its own, provide an indica- hypothesis when it is true will rise accordingly, just as in tion of the likely effect size in the population, just as the the case of multiple tests of significance.

The CI, in contrast, provides this sons are made. In such circumstances, it is often appro- information. In the third FMS study Tab. Such information is ence in pain relief of just over 7 mm on the VAS was potentially important to the clinician but is not revealed sufficient to reject the null hypothesis of no difference by inspection of the probability value alone.

The Physi- with an independent t test. The CI for the hood of death from stroke in the group that received pain-relief scores is wider in this FMS study than in the aspirin to the likelihood of death in the group that previous FMS study Tab. Although a mean difference of 7. Inspection of the upper limit of mm, which is arguably not likely to be clinically impor- the CI for the odds ratio reveals that an almost fold tant, is also compatible with rejection of the null hypoth- difference in fatal stroke between the 2 groups cannot be esis at the P ,.

Thus, there is considerable lack of precision in the odds ratio for this study, which is due to the low 1. Consequently, despite the nonsignificant find- patients with FMS between the 2 interventions tested. The odds ratio is an appropriate measure of Figure 3.

Douglas G. Altman-Practical Statistics for Medical Research-Chapman & Hall_CRC ()

The solid reference line an outcome variable measured on a continuous scale. The horizontal scale is logarithmic. The narrow width of the CI for the total odds ratio found an overall odds ratio for death or deterioration of reflects the precision that results from aggregating data, 0.

This odds ratio means that the likelihood of death and the fact that it excludes 1. Thus, CIs assist conventional therapy. Studies will vary in the contributions they make to the total odds ratio, based on sample sizes and other factors Conclusion that may or may not control random error.

Displaying Interval estimation is a valuable form of statistical infer- the CI for each study on what is known as a forest plot ence that we believe has certain advantages over conven- illustrates clearly the relative merits of the separate tional hypothesis testing based on tests of significance. The sented as an estimate of the corresponding popu- figure also shows the total odds ratio, which is calculated lation parameter the standard deviation of the by statistical analysis of the aggregated data from the mean should be presented if no inference to the individual studies odds ratios can be calculated retro- population is intended.

A ratio of less than 1.

Interpreting the results of observational provided by CIs to assess the clinical importance of research: chance is not such a fine thing. Distribution-Free Tests. Calculating confidence intervals for risk of a Type 1 error. London, England: British Medical Association; — Ordinal Methods for Behavioral Data Analysis.

Oxford, England: Clarendon Press; References 1 Oakes M. Statistical Methods in Medical Research. A randomized controlled trial of confidence intervals rather than p values.

Prev Med. Statistical Significance: Rationale, Validity, and Utility. Lon- Group. Preliminary report: findings from the aspirin component of the don, England: Sage Publications Ltd; N Engl J Med.

A show of confidence. Management Decisions. Towards estimation and confidence intervals.

1st Edition

The medical review article: state of the science. Ann ; Intern Med. Confidence intervals. Accumulating evidence from independent studies: what we can win and what we can lose. Stat Med.

Rationale for systematic reviews. In: Chalmers I, Association; Altman DG, eds.

Practical Statistics for Medical Research

Systematic Reviews. London, England: British Medical Association; — 8. Why rehabilitation research does not work as well as we think it should. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. Meta-analysis: potentials and promise.

Statistics bibliography 07 - stats

Statistical methods. Rehabilitation Studies Handbook. Cambridge, England: Cam- 29 Wood P. C, eds. Research Methods in Psychology. London, England: Sage Publica- tions Ltd; — An Introduction to Medical Statistics. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press; Meta-analysis: principles and procedures. Quantitative methods in nursing research. J Adv Nurs. Reading Statistics and Research. Physiotherapy after stroke: more is better? Physiother Res Int. Statistical Methods for Psychology. Belmont, Calif: Duxbury Press; On visual assessment of the significance of a mean difference.

Comprehending Behavioral Statistics.

Statistics in question: assessing methods— confidence inter- vals. Predicting long-term functional limitations among back pain patients study. Ann Rheum Dis ; J Clin Epidemiol ; The Psychological distress and low back pain: Evidence from a prospective natural history of chronic pain in the community: a better prognosis than study in the general population. Spine ; J Rheumatol ; Back pain in industry.

A prospective Silman AJ. Psychosocial factors in the work place—do they predict new survey.Search this site Statistics bibliography 07 - stats Aarts, G. Prev Med.

A comparison of observational studies and randomized, controlled trials. To download short term access, please sign in to your Oxford Academic account above. Statistics in Medicine Volume 10, Issue Download preview PDF.

download Instant Access. Looking for your next opportunity? Read [free pdf] Czitrom, V. Article Navigation.

You might also like: MEDICINE 1 TEACHERS BOOK
DONITA from Hickory
Also read my other articles. I have only one hobby: sikaran. I do enjoy reading novels delightfully .